Case 3313550/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Naisbitt v Fortnight Limited (in Administration) and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313550/2023
- Decision date
- 5 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr A Naisbitt
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 5 January 2024 at Cambridge, Employment Judge Tynan heard Mr A Naisbitt's application for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The First Respondent did not attend and was not represented. The Second Respondent, Freedom Technology Ltd, was represented by Mr Charity, Consultant.
The tribunal refused the application for interim relief. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's note. The extracted judgment does not set out any further findings on the merits of the underlying dispute.
Because the decision is limited to the interim relief application, no monetary award was made and no remedy figure is recorded in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal refused the claimant's application for interim relief pursuant to section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The extracted judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim beyond that application. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 128 Employment Rights Act 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.